You're not necessarily wrong, but it's important to understand the difference between the work that Eisner and previous leadership did to The Walt Disney Company and what Iger has done to DIS. All of the mergers and acquisitions made over the last decade are not necessarily bad moves for Disney, but actions surrounding these acquisitions, along with other moves the company has made, are examples of inorganic growth.
The Walt Disney Company effectively makes a stable profit off of the back of the intellectual property it owns, but that property came from well-executed creative vision. Sure, you can point to early Walt Disney Productions movies being retelling of old stories, but that was not the whole of the business, and there is no more obvious organic growth than the creation of Disneyland and Walt Disney World. It's important to point to the implosion of the Disney decade, the whirly merge with ABC, and the falling out with Pixar as obvious negatives to the Eisner tenure, but the organic growth already described can't be taken away, especially considering how much work was done to turn P&R into even more of a cash cow. GF, BW... these massive, beautiful resorts that still make the company ridiculous sums of money.
So, that really just leads me to ask, where are we seeing domestic organic growth at DIS under Iger? What are employees of the company able to create with him at the helm? You can only "synergize" for so long before you start to divide by zero. This stunting of organic growth underscores the one thing that can kill this company outside of global thermonuclear war: an virulent, institutional rot that won't fully reveal itself until it's far too late.
